Citizens of the Imperium

Citizens of the Imperium (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/index.php)
-   Traveller 5 (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   5.10 Errata Thread? (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=40180)

DCS July 5th, 2019 07:36 PM

5.10 Errata Thread?
 
With folks now getting the PDF, it seems like perhaps a sticky errata thread for 5.10 is in order. Would help stop cluttering up the normal conversation here.

Ackehece July 6th, 2019 12:12 AM

Errata 5.10
 
Book 3 pp. 33-35,

Textual Error

Orbit 13 got missed off the charts


Submitted by Wol

Ackehece July 6th, 2019 12:13 AM

Book1 Pp 202

Logic Error

KO target status +1 or greater
QUICK KILL target status +1 or greater

Both refer to target being status +1 or greater which means alert to the action according to page 206 Status

This makes no sense as sneaking up on someone and whacking them on the head to knock would usually mean the opposite condition of the target.. more like status -1 inattentive or worse.

Ackehece July 6th, 2019 12:18 AM

The following isNOT Errata

Traveller 8 in the copyright page.
Traveller 8 is T5 for 8 year olds. Traveller Kids special edition that has not as yet seen a release but has been run by Marc for his grandkids and other 8 year olds.

Wol July 6th, 2019 09:58 AM

[Minor] Book 2 p.144. Example - maths seems a bit off:
Active Sensors Increase Target Size. An Active Sensor
provides a Mod + Sensor Range S=.
At Range S=7 an ACS ship Size-7 with sensors in Psv
Mode is Size-0 (7-7=0). If it Activates its S=7 Ant AR Radar-9, it becomes Size-7 (7-7+7=0) in the Sensor Task.
regards

Wol July 6th, 2019 11:43 AM

p.29 Book 3

Hospitable secondary world generation. Only 1 in 6 produces a hospitable none-main world. And per the note -
- HZ, HZ +HZ
1D Description
1 Inferno
2 Inner World
3 BigWorld
4 StormWorld
5 RadWorld
6 Hospitable*

* Special situation (probably albedo
).

This could be a way of getting rid of lots of otherwise nice planets around non-primary stars - but does not really fit with the adjacent comments:
Habitable Zone (HZ) orbit number
indicates a world surface environment
hospitable to humans and similar.


Additionally chart 2B (noted for mainworlds):
HZ+1-Cold. Tundra. trade code Tu., but you are as likely to generate an inferno world as a hospitable using the secondary world generation in HZ+1.
So a cold inferno? Perhaps the note should have applied to inferno worlds?

regards

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 12:49 PM

Book 1, pg 61, 2nd column, 5th paragraph

Mechanic error

Sophomore year 2: check Edu (roll 6 or less, roll 5) ** fails **


Submitted by John Meyers

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 12:52 PM

Book 3, Index

Textual error

Chamax Hunter page 255, 257

Actual pg 264

Submitted by Joe Resesv

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 01:01 PM

Can we have a standard errata format

Location:

Book number, page number, column, paragraph number, chart name, chart number

1st and 2nd are a basic requirement to define location of error, other data just makes it easier.

Type of error:

Textual error (spelling, grammar, wrong label, etc)
Logic error (system results in an illogical result)
Mechanic error (mechanic used is used in a improper manner)

Description of issue:

1st paragraph: What it says that is possibly incorrect
2nd paragraph: Why incorrect.
3rd paragraph: What you believe is correct, or if you don't have a solution leave this off

Submitted by
Coti user name or real name.

Beerfume July 7th, 2019 02:11 PM

Book 1, page 7, first column: page number for The Senses is 187, not 186. This is shown correctly in the two other Contents pages.

Book 3, page 262, top of page, spelling error: Bestiary (without the 'a').

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beerfume (Post 603848)

Book 1, page 7, first column:

Textual Error

page number for The Senses is 187, not 186.
This is shown correctly in the two other Contents pages.


--------------


Book 3, page 262, top of page,

Textual error:

Bestiary (without the 'a').



Thanks for the submission. Surprised by bestiry vs bestiary as a spell check should have caught something like that. There is no alternative spelling that would cover that.

TWTP July 7th, 2019 05:36 PM

Gas Giant Mapping
 
Book 3 Gas giants

Gas giants are set up to be mapped but the actual method for doing so is not present.

DCS July 7th, 2019 06:02 PM

Location:

Book number 1, page 73 versus Book 1, page 83

Type of error: Mechanic Error

Description of issue:

The Career summary chart on page 73 lists Agent Risk and Reward as Str C2 C3 Int. The Career page on page 83, lists it as C1 C2 C3 C4

C1 C2 C3 C4 seems better since an agent is embedded within their own society (typically). Not sure of the actual intent,

Submitted by
DCS

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCS (Post 603857)
Location:

Book number 1, page 73 versus Book 1, page 83

Type of error: Mechanic Error

Description of issue:

The Career summary chart on page 73 lists Agent Risk and Reward as Str C2 C3 Int. The Career page on page 83, lists it as C1 C2 C3 C4

C1 C2 C3 C4 seems better since an agent is embedded within their own society (typically). Not sure of the actual intent,

Submitted by
DCS

This is one that is :confused: confusing but it is not incorrect.


C1 is str, C2 (can be multiple names), C3(Can be multiple names), and C4 is Int

C1 is always Strength
c2, Dexterity, or Agility, or Grace
c3, Endurance, or Stamina, or Vigor
C4 is always Intelligence.

so Str, C2, C3, Int is the same (synonymous) as saying C1, C2, C3, C4

I do agree staying with the C1 to C4 format makes more sense.
maybe this should be treated as a

TEXTUAL ERROR?

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWTP (Post 603855)
Book 3 Gas giants

Gas giants are set up to be mapped but the actual method for doing so is not present.

do you have a page number for the reference to gas giants... I know the method doesn't have a page number from your description.

TWTP July 7th, 2019 08:04 PM

Book 3 page 73 is where the terrain types for a gas giant are listed.

Book 3 Page 74 has the Habitat and the instructions on how to map a habitat.

TWTP July 7th, 2019 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ackehece (Post 603860)
do you have a page number for the reference to gas giants... I know the method doesn't have a page number from your description.

Book 3 page 73 is where the terrain types for a gas giant are listed.

Book 3 Page 74 has the Habitat and the instructions on how to map a habitat.

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWTP (Post 603865)
Book 3 page 73 is where the terrain types for a gas giant are listed.

Book 3 Page 74 has the Habitat and the instructions on how to map a habitat.

Book 3 page 29 is used for determining planetary orbits. This is where you will find how to place gas giants.


Starting page 56 to page 73 world building is planetary surfaces and not related to the design of the star system on a orbital level.

Page 74 refers designing space habitats not habital zones.

The placement of that chart is ok but your understanding of the section is a bit wrong. Pg 73 is informational to generating the map on pg 72 of your gas giant if you so desire to map the gas giant,
it is not referencing the orbits at all but the planetary "surface".

If you want the orbits for gas giants please see Book 3 page 29

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 09:18 PM

Weirdly enough page 373 and 374 of book 3 of T20 Traveller does refer to orbits of gas giants...

Spartan159 July 7th, 2019 10:07 PM

Book 3 Page 126, Armor Stage Effects - Are the values for Improved and Modified correct? The Ar through Se numbers seem to be swapped.

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 10:08 PM

Errata T5.10
 
Book 3: Worlds and Adventures page 236.
Table labeled bulk

Assumed Textual Error

For example, a Virushi rolls Str= 5D Dex= 3D End= 2D
for a total of 10D. Because Str is 4D or greater, multiply 10D
by 120 = 1200 liters = 1200 kilograms (= a little over a ton).

+

Some sophonts have disproportionate Size (called Bulk)
Str Size= Size Range
1D (C1 Dice + C2 Dice + C3 Dice) * 12 24- 120
2D (C1 Dice + C2 Dice + C3 Dice) * 12 36- 132
3D (C1 Dice + C2 Dice + C3 Dice) * 12 48- 144
4D (C1 Dice + C2 Dice + C3 Dice) * 48 240- 624
5D (C1 Dice + C2 Dice + C3 Dice) * 60 360- 840
6D (C1 Dice + C2 Dice + C3 Dice) * 72 504-1080
7D (C1 Dice + C2 Dice + C3 Dice) * 84 672-1344
8D (C1 Dice + C2 Dice + C3 Dice) * 96 864-1632


First column is called str but to calculate bulk it appears that that column should be called nD = Size (size calculated in column two)
As that is how both examples are used on the page.
alternatively if it is str then the example is wrong as the example says the virushi is 5d strength. (Mechanic error) this is unlikely in context.

Possible Mechanic errata (derivation of the table)

Table does not explain how values are derived but the example uses a derived value outside the range of the table.

Derivation of values of the table are done as follows:

nD x 12 for the size multiplier
((nDx12) x (10+ (nD-1))) = maximum mass for that tier.


Submitted by : Nathan Brazil

Ackehece July 7th, 2019 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spartan159 (Post 603875)
Book 3 Page 126, Armor Stage Effects - Are the values for Improved and Modified correct? The Ar through Se numbers seem to be swapped.


Improved and Modified are closely linked but have different results. Modified is not necessarily better (see weapons where modified only weighs less but has more bulk than the improved model)
So we can provisionally mark it errata but I suspect it might be correct.


This chart is the same from 5.09 pg236 and was not flagged as errata afaik.
I will check the consolidated errata file to see if this has been answered before. Checking both the 5.0 and 5.09 errata files does not list this as previous errata (even though both version have this table) that doesn't mean it is right, just that if it is wrong it hasn't been flagged before.



Any opinions on this one gognards? I mean Modified is TL +2 but not as good overall as improved which is only TL+1 in some cases (armor maker) and in others it is marginally better.

Taythorian July 8th, 2019 01:45 AM

A quick question.

Once we have all this Errata etc, are there plans to put it into a Doc / PDF or if ok, I would be happy to update the Errata Section of the Wiki.

I am working (slowly at the mo due to work) on inputting the Errata from other Editions at the moment.

Cheers

Bryan

Ackehece July 8th, 2019 04:09 AM

Document form as well as errata on the wiki if you are willing to do the work.
Always better to have more access then less.

Taythorian July 8th, 2019 06:11 AM

Yeah, I kind of already volunteered to look after that part of the Wiki.

Once the Doc is at a Version 1, pass it over and I’ll upload to Wiki. If then moves to a Version 2, I’ll upload changes etc.

I’m assuming it will be in similar format to the CT Errata Doc.

Ackehece July 8th, 2019 08:21 AM

Book 1, Page 61, 2nd column, 5th paragraph:

Textual error / Mechanic error ( it is obviously textual, but the result is a mechanic error)

Sophomore Year 2: Check Edu (roll 6 or less; he rolls
5) and fails. He applies for Waiver

Edu check obviously passed and no waiver requires.

Submitted by John Myers

Wol July 8th, 2019 11:05 AM

Book 1 p.23. Textual. (nit)
Cubic yard described as .05 of a 'ton' but a 'ton' described as containing 18 cubic yards. The latter is closer. The former should be about .057.

stuartsmith183 July 8th, 2019 11:34 AM

Ship Shares Inconsistency.
 
Inconsistent ship share

Book 1 Pg 80 Merchant; Ship Shares ... a typical merchant ship is 10 to 20 shares
Book 1 Pg 90 Ship Shares; Shares are all less than 10

Instead of 50 tons per share, 10 tons per share? Then a Free Trader would be 20 shares.

And a question of clarification on purchase vs. loan. Why would getting a Ship on Loan cost as much in shares as purchasing a ship? Leasing a car is a bit cheaper than buying it outright.

Ackehece July 8th, 2019 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wol (Post 603904)
Book 1 p.23. Textual. (nit)
Cubic yard described as .05 of a 'ton' but a 'ton' described as containing 18 cubic yards. The latter is closer. The former should be about .057.

Testing:

Ton is defined as 13500 ltrs
A cyard is defined as = to one yard = .05 ton = 765 ltrs.

If you take 765 x 18 you end up with 13770ltrs... so very close to the defined value for a displacement ton.

13500 ÷18 is 750 rather than 765 but still close
~765 is the actual conversion of imperial cubic yards to metric liters...

Now let's test .05ton = cyard
13500 x .05 is 675... so drastically different.

The .05 ton is the wrong part.
I see where that value comes from.
.05 imperial ton is ~ 50kg which and a metric ton is 1000kg.
50÷1000 gives .05 ton.
But we are using displacement tonnage not mass tonnage.

So let's flag .05ton as wrong and .057 does sound better.

Thanks for the errata . This had snuck through many generations of Traveller, not the least is T4, T5.0 , T5.9

Because the conversion is wrong and actually converts to the wrong type of ton is it textual or mechanic?

Ackehece July 8th, 2019 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stuartsmith183 (Post 603906)
Inconsistent ship share

Book 1 Pg 80 Merchant; Ship Shares ... a typical merchant ship is 10 to 20 shares
Book 1 Pg 90 Ship Shares; Shares are all less than 10

Instead of 50 tons per share, 10 tons per share? Then a Free Trader would be 20 shares.

And a question of clarification on purchase vs. loan. Why would getting a Ship on Loan cost as much in shares as purchasing a ship? Leasing a car is a bit cheaper than buying it outright.


Ship shares seem to be correct atv1 share per 50dton:
Page 90 is very clear in example and in text that specifically states it is 1 ship share per 50 ton displacement.
10 shares at 50ton is 500 dtonne, and 20 shares at 50 is 1000 dton.
The calculation seem right... the perception is wrong because you are only looking at low tonnage ships on the chart on page 90. the free trader on pg 90 is only 200 dton.
A subsidized merchant is 400 dton and would require 8 shares.
Class A merchants range from 100dton to 2499 dton in size and thus the need for much high numbers of ship shares.
That means from 2 to 50 shares to cover all conceivable class a merchants. 10 to 20 seems fair, as it covers the middle ground of adventure class ship, when considering that.

As for loan ... I think that is an errata issue. Scouts always previously were loan ships as well as lab ships. Merchants were purchased. I think the merchant ship loan was supposed to be scout.
The idea that loan ships are ships in the reserves. The value of the ship was lower but the utility was high. Scouts got loan shares, scholars got loan shares.


Mechanic errata
Book1, Pg 90 , ship shares

Loan placed on merchant ship and not scout ship

Fix

Scout ship is loan ship.

whulorigan July 8th, 2019 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stuartsmith183 (Post 603906)
Inconsistent ship share

Book 1 Pg 80 Merchant; Ship Shares ... a typical merchant ship is 10 to 20 shares
Book 1 Pg 90 Ship Shares; Shares are all less than 10

Instead of 50 tons per share, 10 tons per share? Then a Free Trader would be 20 shares.

And a question of clarification on purchase vs. loan. Why would getting a Ship on Loan cost as much in shares as purchasing a ship? Leasing a car is a bit cheaper than buying it outright.

In T5.09, it was 25 tons per share, not 50 per share. However, it seems that the shares given out in CharGen have not been altered to reflect the change.

I already brought this up to Marc in an e-mail that I sent to him along with other potential errata or clarification issues (which was unfortunately after the documents were sent to the printers :( ). Note that Book 1, p.80 says that the average Merchant Ship is 10-20 shares. At 25 tons/share this is 250-500 tons; at 50 tons/share, that is 500-1000 tons.

Wol July 9th, 2019 04:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ackehece (Post 603909)
Testing:

Ton is defined as 13500 ltrs
A cyard is defined as = to one yard = .05 ton = 765 ltrs.

If you take 765 x 18 you end up with 13770ltrs... so very close to the defined value for a displacement ton.

13500 ÷18 is 750 rather than 765 but still close
~765 is the actual conversion of imperial cubic yards to metric liters...

Now let's test .05ton = cyard
13500 x .05 is 675... so drastically different.

The .05 ton is the wrong part.
I see where that value comes from.
.05 imperial ton is ~ 50kg which and a metric ton is 1000kg.
50÷1000 gives .05 ton.
But we are using displacement tonnage not mass tonnage.

So let's flag .05ton as wrong and .057 does sound better.

Thanks for the errata . This had snuck through many generations of Traveller, not the least is T4, T5.0 , T5.9

Because the conversion is wrong and actually converts to the wrong type of ton is it textual or mechanic?

Given 20cwt to the ton that explanation would fit.

Probably more mechanc as it might result in some distortion in dimensions.

regards

Wol July 9th, 2019 06:15 AM

book 1 p.31 charts o5 clarification.

No MD is effective around a dwarf star (inside orbit 0).

BOTE , from Book 6 scouts, a dwarf is about .01 Diameter Sun (+/-), and 1000D is thus about 8 million miles or 13 million km. Orbit 0 is .2 Au or 29 million km. So you can jump into such a system, just outside the 100 D distance from a planet in orbit 0, use the MD within 1000D of the planet and that is about it, intra system travel will need to be by jump or another method.

regards

Wol July 9th, 2019 08:44 AM

Book 1 p27 bottom example textual
Terra is Orbit O= 3; Jupiter is Orbit O= 5. They are about 4.2 AU apart at their closest; or 6.2 AU apart at their greatest separation. They are, in either case, in the same Range Band S= 12. A ship capable of 2G (Table 8b) can make the journey in about 3 hours.

Jupiter is in orbit 6 not 5, at S=13, and Terra is in S=11. Band for travel is indeed S12. Table 8b is speed not time - which are 9a&b. Start stop time is 3 days not hours according to table 9a, so hope they brought more than a packed lunch.

AnotherDilbert July 9th, 2019 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ackehece (Post 603878)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Spartan159 (Post 603875)
Book 3 Page 126, Armor Stage Effects - Are the values for Improved and Modified correct? The Ar through Se numbers seem to be swapped.

Improved and Modified are closely linked but have different results. Modified is not necessarily better (see weapons where modified only weighs less but has more bulk than the improved model)
So we can provisionally mark it errata but I suspect it might be correct.

Looks like an error (list from T5.09, p236):
Code:

STAGE          TL    Mass    Ar  Ca  Fl  Ra  So  Ps  In  Se      Cr
Basic          0    1.3    -5  -5  -5  -5  -5    0  -5  -5    × 0.7
(blank)        0    1.0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    × 1.0
Standard        1    1.0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    × 1.0
Alternate      1    1.1    5    5    5    5    5    0  15    5    × 1.1
Enhanced        1    2.0    3    3    3    3    3    0    9    3    × 4.0
Improved        1    1.0    6    6    6    6    6    0  18    6    × 1.1
Modified        2    0.9    3    3    3    3    3    0    9    3    × 1.2
Advanced        3    0.8    10  10  10  10  10    3  20  10    × 2.0
Obsolete        4    0.7    3    3    3    3    3    0    9    9    × 0.5

Why would anyone ever want to use Enhanced or Modified?

Ackehece July 9th, 2019 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnotherDilbert (Post 603961)
Looks like an error (list from T5.09, p236):
Code:

STAGE          TL    Mass    Ar  Ca  Fl  Ra  So  Ps  In  Se      Cr
Basic          0    1.3    -5  -5  -5  -5  -5    0  -5  -5    × 0.7
(blank)        0    1.0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    × 1.0
Standard        1    1.0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    × 1.0
Alternate      1    1.1    5    5    5    5    5    0  15    5    × 1.1
Enhanced        1    2.0    3    3    3    3    3    0    9    3    × 4.0
Improved        1    1.0    6    6    6    6    6    0  18    6    × 1.1
Modified        2    0.9    3    3    3    3    3    0    9    3    × 1.2
Advanced        3    0.8    10  10  10  10  10    3  20  10    × 2.0
Obsolete        4    0.7    3    3    3    3    3    0    9    9    × 0.5

Why would anyone ever want to use Enhanced or Modified?

I am sure your right... just surprised that it wasn't flagged before as being to weak (or too strong depending on which is incorrect)
It does seem that inverting Ar to Ps would resolve the TL difference.

whulorigan July 10th, 2019 02:05 PM

ERRATA - T5.10 - Book 1 (1st of 2 Posts)
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by whulorigan (Post 603916)
... I already brought this up to Marc in an e-mail that I sent to him along with other potential errata or clarification issues (which was unfortunately after the documents were sent to the printers :( ). ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ackehece (Post 603985)
I'll type up a errata doc tomorrow with what has been found so far.

Attached are the errata documents for Book 1 that I sent to Marc AFTER T5.10 went to print. I may have made some mistakes myself, if I misinterpreted something.

Take a look over them and see if you concur.

whulorigan July 10th, 2019 02:05 PM

ERRATA - T5.10 - Book 2 (2nd of 2 Posts)
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by whulorigan (Post 603916)
... I already brought this up to Marc in an e-mail that I sent to him along with other potential errata or clarification issues (which was unfortunately after the documents were sent to the printers :( ). ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ackehece (Post 603985)
I'll type up a errata doc tomorrow with what has been found so far.

Attached are the errata documents for Book 2 that I sent to Marc AFTER T5.10 went to print. I may have made some mistakes myself, if I misinterpreted something.

Take a look over them and see if you concur.

TWTP July 10th, 2019 04:19 PM

you have obviously misunderstood what I meant.
Mapping the gas giants surface. not placing the gas giant in the system.
How do you place the Gas Giant terrain symbols found on page 73 of book 3. IE "G31 Vortex".




Quote:

Originally Posted by Ackehece (Post 603869)
Book 3 page 29 is used for determining planetary orbits. This is where you will find how to place gas giants.


Starting page 56 to page 73 world building is planetary surfaces and not related to the design of the star system on a orbital level.

Page 74 refers designing space habitats not habital zones.

The placement of that chart is ok but your understanding of the section is a bit wrong. Pg 73 is informational to generating the map on pg 72 of your gas giant if you so desire to map the gas giant,
it is not referencing the orbits at all but the planetary "surface".

If you want the orbits for gas giants please see Book 3 page 29


Ackehece July 10th, 2019 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWTP (Post 604005)
you have obviously misunderstood what I meant.
Mapping the gas giants surface. not placing the gas giant in the system.
How do you place the Gas Giant terrain symbols found on page 73 of book 3. IE "G31 Vortex".

Ah yes then I did misinterpret. This is why I explain back. I'll look at it again and make sure i understand it then.

Ackehece July 11th, 2019 06:39 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by whulorigan (Post 604003)
Attached are the errata documents for Book 2 that I sent to Marc AFTER T5.10 went to print. I may have made some mistakes myself, if I misinterpreted something.

Take a look over them and see if you concur.

Attachment 1743 this should be up to date with what is listed. this has some editorializing in it...

Ackehece July 11th, 2019 06:40 PM

been working that last few days creating a DB of errata with custom web form for entry etc.



I have noticed that book 2 hasn't had many errata entries yet. people are reading book 1 and 3 first it seems.

whulorigan July 11th, 2019 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ackehece (Post 604041)
been working that last few days creating a DB of errata with custom web form for entry etc.

I have noticed that book 2 hasn't had many errata entries yet. people are reading book 1 and 3 first it seems.

@Ackehece:
Did you notice that up-thread I posted TWO documents in TWO separate posts:

T5.10 DRAFT - Book 1 Errata (WHU).docx
T5.10 DRAFT - Book 2 Errata (WHU).docx

I have about 5 pages of Book 2 Errata - It was the first book I looked at. :)

The two posts look like they are a Double-Post, but they are not.

See attachment: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...3&postcount=38

Ackehece July 11th, 2019 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whulorigan (Post 604057)
@Ackehece:
Did you notice that up-thread I posted TWO documents in TWO separate posts:

T5.10 DRAFT - Book 1 Errata (WHU).docx
T5.10 DRAFT - Book 2 Errata (WHU).docx

I have about 5 pages of Book 2 Errata - It was the first book I looked at. :)

The two posts look like they are a Double-Post, but they are not.

See attachment: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...3&postcount=38

missed the second one :P sorry it really did look like a double post.

Dr. Gizmo July 13th, 2019 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ackehece (Post 604041)
been working that last few days creating a DB of errata with custom web form for entry etc.

What about a Google Sheet, perhaps with a Google Form front-ending it?

Wol July 14th, 2019 10:15 AM

Book 1:

p.206 Mechanic- Tactics Mod- Tactics + flux but p.207 example has Characteristic + Tactics + Flux ( for a value of 14. Presumably p.206 is correct.

p.176 textual - working age example has true age of 9 months but working age of 18 months!
True age (per text) should be years not months for used items. Otherwise we have a problem.

p.153 Textual - Skills Language should be after p.154 JOT and before Leader. The text from p.152. stops and restarts on p.154.

p.143 Textual - Bureaucrat appears as a gloss on pp 141 & 143, should only be on p. 141.

p.157 Textual - Chart for Musicians skill/knowledge advancement appears below header for next skill - Naval Architect. Should be above the header.

p.175 Logic - "inspecting an object". This should reference p. 144 (Craftsman) and p.63 (Trader) but is not consistent as it allows only one determination of a QREBS per skill:

"A skilled individual can check an object: it takes about
an hour to carefully look it over, test its operation, disassemble and reassemble it looking for flaws or problems. The
inspector must have a skill related to the object. ...An as-inspected QREBS for the object is then created,
randomly substituting one correct value for each level of inspector skill (to a maximum of 4). "

It is possibly intended to be in addition to the Craftsman/Trader Skills - but this is unclear.

Wol July 14th, 2019 10:35 AM

Book 1:

p.131 - Textual - Text explaining Destructive is the same as that for Dangerous - presumably something else was intended.?

p. 130 - Textual - Transit example:

"Transit/Travel Tasks
To travel to a destination in a deep space fighter.
Easy (1D) < Dex +Small Craft
All three individuals have Edu 7, which in conjunction
with Small Craft-3 requires a roll of 10 or less. Using one die,
success is guaranteed."

Stated Char. is Dex, but Edu used in example.

p.201 -Logic - Who acts when?

"Who Acts When?
Within the Combat Round, everyone moves (if they
choose to) to change Range bands.
Everyone Targets at once. Each Player Character decides who he or she is going to attack, and each can change
his or her mind as the action in the Round progresses
.
The participants each Attack separately. Players volunteer their characters to Attack if they want. The Referee interrupts with Non-Player Character Attacks where appropriate. As the Attack phase progresses, every participant has
the opportunity to make an Attack."

This seem incoherent, especially considering that the Initiative rules (p.212) are optional. eg:

I attack first. No I do with a snap shot, No I shoot first as I have chnged my mind and fire a snap shot before your snap shot etc.

Really not sure what was intended here.

Wol July 14th, 2019 10:51 AM

Book 1.

P.215 - Mechanic? - ESCAPE FROM THE BATTLEFIELD

"...
Vehicles (especially Flyers) at Speed 5
or greater can move between Band 6 and
Band 6 in one Round."

This should read
"Vehicles (especially Flyers) at Speed 5
or greater can move between Band FIVE(5) and
Band 6 in one Round."

p.216 Mechanic - The Observer Process
The rules here do not tally with those p.150. Not sure which is correct?

p.216 Rules:
"The Observer Process
A Forward Observer identifies a Target, communicates
with an Indirect Fire weapon operator, and tells it the Target’s location identifiers (he may give coordinates by voice,
or transmit data).
On the Forward Observer’s command (Fire One!) by
communicator, the weapon shoots one ranging shot. It arrives in the next Round.
The shot may deviate from a direct hit: roll Flux twice:
once for vertical deviation and once for horizontal deviation.
The Forward Observer observes the impact of the shot.
Hit! If it hits, he tells the weapon operator (Hit! Fire For
Effect) and the weapon now fires one normal shot. It hits in
the next Round.
Miss! If it misses, he tells the weapon operator (Miss!
Up X Left Y) and the weapon fires a ranging shot (which now
does not involve Flux, and will hit as directed). It hits in the
next Round and the process repeats.
Deviation Scale. Indirect Fire weapons deviate in units
of 50 meters. This may keep the hits in the same Range
Band, or may move it to another Range Band."

P.150 Skill use:
"Traditional Fire Control
The individual knows the procedures used to call in indirect fire weaponry. The first step is to call in a preliminary
(or targeting) round. If that is not a direct hit, then a second
round is called in (and a third or however many are required).
When a preliminary round hits the target center, then the
Forward Observer commands Fire For Effect.
To call in indirect fire weaponry on a target (preliminary)
Average (2D) < Edu + Fwd Obs
Success places the first hit Flux times 100 meters from
the target center. The character is observing the target and
observes where the hits land. Failure indicates that the character does not see the hits impact; repeat task.
If the first round is not a hit, standard practice calls for
the point of impact to be shifted 400 meters toward the target. The second shift is 200 meters; third shift: 100 meters.
To call in indirect fire weaponry on a target (adjusted).
Average (2D) < Dex + Fwd Obs + Mods
Character states the increment of shift (400 meters, 200
meters, 100 meters). Referee shifts the fire and indicates if
it hit or missed.
To call artillery fire for effect (final)
Easy (1D) < Dex + Fwd Obs
Local conditions can influence the accuracy of Forward
Observers: climate, weather, atmosphere, confusion."

It is unclear why the difference or whether both might be used?

Wol July 14th, 2019 11:26 AM

Book 1.

P.225 - Combat examples.

Some weird stuff happening here:

Mechanic:
Note 3:
"3 The Size=5 synthetics are all crouched to reduce their visual size to 3. At R=3 Size minus Range is zero. No one sees anything."

Vision rules simply state that:
"Size minus Range gives apparent size. A Size-5 Person at Range=5 looks about the same size as a Size-6
Vehicle at Range=6. If Size minus Range is less than zero, the object to too far away to see (or to be attacked)."

And obviously a size 5 object at range 5 would look like nothing otherwise :)

Inter alia p.187 example confirms this:
"resolving a Vision Action
at Range=5 and Size=5 uses 5D."

BUT! p.190 - Vision contradicts this:
"Benchmark. Object Size minus Range. If zero or less, the
Action cannot be attempted".

However, the example on the very same page ignores this and uses the earlier definition:
"Vision Constant = 16. Benchmark = Size minus Range
= 6-6 = 0
. Mod = +2 Vfast."

Note the benchmark =0.

And, p.191, the example again allows benchmark = 0

"An unaided human V-16-RGB has a 40% chance of noticing a person Size = 5 at R=5. Roll 16 or less on 5D (=40%
chance of success).".

[So actually they had a pretty good chance of seeing (if not hitting) the synthetics.]

Note in the examples p. 225, the synthetics are NOT in cover or "concealed" per se, despite the description.(& see p.206):
"The unseen attackers crouch behind a ferrocrete retaining wall covered in vines, about 200 meters distant, R=3."

If they were in cover, they would have a penalty for firing from cover as a mod. per pp.205-206. No (attacker) cover penalty is noted in any of there firing.

I *think* this simply follows the p.186 comment:

"Most people (sophonts) are Size=5. A half-hidden person is Size=4, as is a small sophont. Just a head or a limb is Size=3. "

Wol July 14th, 2019 12:26 PM

Book 1.
P.225 Textual? - Combat examples.

Round 3 Note 7:
"7 SN 8. R=3. Bee is crouching Size=3. S-R=-0. Attack Mode=
Single (-1D). Target number is 8 on 2D. She rolls 7 and hits."

As Bee fired - aimed fire - she should be size +1 per p. 206.

P.225 - Clarification - Combat examples.
Note 14:
"14 The second shot is Bullet-2 (6+4=10) which penetrates the
window (Ar=9) with 1 point. Trent takes 1 Hit Point reducing Dex 8
to Dex 7."

This is a shot that has come through the transpex window. No idea how big it is, but there is no damage location rolled so it looks like the impact is assumed to be to Trent's head and he has no helmet listed. Otherwise it would fail to penetrate his armour an Item not a suit/Dress/Armour (Cloth - 8 Ar 14).


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.